A blog sharing information about materials presented to children on climate, highlighting those intended to frighten or mislead, and those which seek to inform and inspire rather than to recruit, even the very young, for an ill-founded political campaign around the threat of CAGW. A campaign which is irresponsible, destructive, divisive, and degrading.

'First, the non-climatic effects of carbon dioxide are dominant over the climatic effects and are overwhelmingly beneficial. Second, the climatic effects observed in the real world are much less damaging than the effects predicted by the climate models, and have also been frequently beneficial.'

Thursday, 9 January 2014

Big Climate USA: a voracious monster scaring the children, and threatening the land and its people

Monsters used to be part of mythology, but we can see them reappearing in modern forms to frighten children into conforming with the views and the demands of climate campaigners. Where do they come from? Who is paying for them? Some answers for the States at least have surfaced recently.

A letter from the Committee on Energy and
Commerce of the House of Representatives was sent in October 2013 to the
director of the Office of Management and Budget to get an update ‘regarding
climate change activities being carried out across the federal
government’. They appended a chart from
2011 listing ‘over 40 federal agencies and sub-agencies’ and asked if it was
still accurate. I daresay it may need
enlarging now, but in the meantime here it is, a partial anatomy of a federal
monster which is now gobbling up cash at the rate of at least $22 billion
dollars per year:

The threat of man-made global warming is obviously quite expensive to study and promote, and it must seem even more so as record cold temperatures spread across the USA. Record cold temperatures which of course were
never part of the settled science of global warming, except of course in
retrospect.

The latest wheeze of those promoting this scare in the States is to blame the cold spell on global warming
via its presumed effect on a new piece of jargon for the general public, the polar vortex. This is another sorry example of
shoot-from-the-hip junk science designed to promote headlines and save face in
the mass media. It has already been
discredited. Like so many other examples
of this in recent years, the speed of rebuttal is remarkable. More and more informed people, I surmise,
have lost patience with the charlatans who presume to speak in the name of
Science when in fact they are merely crafters of press releases to suit the
political needs of the moment.
See http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/record-cold-due-to-global-warming.htmlfor a compilation of some relevant papers and articles on this particular piece of PR.
[P.S. Climate Depot has also assembled a list of materials on the polar vortex spin]
[P.P.S Paul Homewood present more analysis in support of his concluding sentence 'More junk science from John Holdren. ']

But back to our monster.
Peter Wilson, writing in the American Thinker, published the above chart
this month, and provides many interesting comments that are very relevant to
the child-scaring propensities of the monster it reveals. Namely the so-called educational initiatives (I have added the bolding):

There are
many possible explanations for this sorry state of affairs, but one factor that
doesn't add anything positive is the politicization of education, a culmination
of fifty years of a "long march through the institutions" by
leftists. Humanities and social sciences have been most corrupted, but STEM
disciplines are being assaulted by a new agenda promoting "climate
education" or "climate literacy."

Areporttitled "Climate Literacy,"
signed by President Obama's science czar John Holdren, declares that
"Climate Science Literacy is part of Science [STEM] Literacy." The
usual arguments are presented: 1) recent global warming "represents an
extraordinary rapid rate of change compared to changes in the previous 10,000
years." 2) Rising temperatures will lead to "rising global sea level
and increasing frequency and intensity of heat waves, droughts, and
floods." 3) "human activities are now the primary cause of most of
the ongoing increase in Earth's globally averaged surface temperature."

Many climate scientists disagree with
these three propositions; at very least, they are partisan viewpoints with
political implications that have no place in public education.

This
campaign is being advanced by local, state and federal governments, by
universities and various non-profits, and is aimed at K-16 -- kindergarten
through college.”

Find your MP, MEP, etc (UK only)

Contact Your Politician

Enter your Postcode below:

If something here catches your attention, please consider emailing an extract and link together with your own views to one or more of your elected representatives. Your impact will be hugely increased if you provide your real name and postcode so that the recipients can see that you live in their constituency. Otherwise your efforts may well be wasted.

Observed and Expected Temperatures

Scafetta Model
This displays a forecast made by Scafetta using a simple model combining various cycles which have been observed in temperatures, together with some 'adjustment for global warming'. His forecast has the light blue background. An IPCC 2007 'projection' is shown with a green background. The bold red-then-blue line is the HadCRUT calculation of a global mean temperature, with blue line connecting the most recent results. (Source: Tallbloke's blog). A 2016 paper by Scafetta: http://www.iieta.org/sites/default/files/Journals/HTECH/IJHT.34.S2_35.pdf